How does the Jones character come across? This has so far kept me away from seeing this film, it just seems a little risky to have an action film starring a man in his 60s whose not an athlete in real life.

Same as he always was, except with more cheesy one liners. Also, he doesn't shoot anyone in the movie, because Spielberg said he wanted to give a good example to kids.

Don't even bother seeing it, seriously. Take my word for it...the movie ****ing sucks. I was literally surprised when I saw that it got pretty good reviews.

I fortunately went to this not overexpecting another great action flic. So I wasn't disappointed, except for thinking it over afterwards. There still might be folks who haven't seen it so I'm not going to plant spoilers. My main points are: Spielberg makes stuff that is totally watchable, even if the plots aren't that good. In the case of "War of the Worlds" I thought the plot really sucked, it subtracted from the HG Wells original and even from the 1950's movie version. But you could still admire the film-making. Indy IV is similar, but it's just not very well written. It is not logical, and it's juvenile, WHICH IS NOT A PROBLEM, because that's part of the Indy Series, howsoever it is not as clever as it should be.
I liked Indy I and Indy III and Indy II was well watchable it gave Spielberg a chance to employ his wife. Indy IV has cooler scenes but is on the same level as a story as Indy II. So it's a worth a rent, or a download, but I wouldn't pay for a BluRAY.

They should have left it at III, Indy and his dad both drink from the holy grail, and they all ride off into the sunset. Actor great Denholm Ellioitt (Marcus Brody) being dead, Sean Connery's character being killed off, and all the other actors looking extremely old, the whole film just shattered the romantic universe created in the end of LAST Crusade. Making another one after that was just in incredibly poor taste. The ONLY thing that could have justified it would have been an INCREDIBLE plot, but unfortunately this latest installment was the silliest, sloppiest, weakest story I have seen in a long time. The first half of the movie seemed to have no clue where it was going, and the second half when it finally does find its way, leaves you wishing it had stayed lost. Just picture National Treasure meets Mission to Mars meets a steaming pile of ****. File this latest Lucas creation next to Jar-Jar Binks.

I saw it in the theater and was appalled from the first scene (I did not pay for the ticket). Cinematic trash sums it up succinctly. The Scientologist inspired alien heads in the finale just added to the vomit.

I saw it in the theater and was appalled from the first scene (I did not pay for the ticket). Cinematic trash sums it up succinctly. The Scientologist inspired alien heads in the finale just added to the vomit.

It's weak. The villains are no threat, so the heroes just have a scenic fun ride to the end, where, regardless of what previously happened, the aliens solve any remaining problems the heroes might have. Not that Indy needed help. As he had already proved, he's atomic bomb proof.

The main villain, Irina Spalko, isn't weak because of Cate Blanchett. The script defines her as weak, and not very evil. She shows up, announces that her power is telepathy - and promptly discovers that the will of the amazing Professor Jones is too powerful for her. It doesn't get better. Ultimately her motive is a simple desire to know more. There's nothing wrong with that, but she gets disposed of anyway.

It seems like Steven Spielberg can't get into Communists being evil, nasty, threatening, domineering villains. Spielberg has been right into Nazis being villains you love to hate, and that's given some of his best movies energy. He was OK hating the evil heathens of the Temple of Doom. Communism - what's wrong with that? He includes it, because it's part of the 50s, but it isn't more than a period trope.